Supreme Court strikes down buffer zone law

Thursday

Jun 26, 2014 at 1:31 PMJun 26, 2014 at 1:31 PM

By Matthew MurphyState House News Service

The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision on Thursday, voided the state’s 7-year-old law that created a 35-foot buffer zone outside family planning clinics in Massachusetts that had been challenged on the grounds that it violated protesters’ right to free speech or to counsel patrons.The law, which was co-authored by former Reps. Carl Sciortino and Marty Walz, who now leads Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, updated a previous law signed by the late Gov. Paul Cellucci that created an 18-foot buffer around abortion clinics, but allowed for a 6-foot floating buffer zone that protestors could enter if they interpreted consent from a clinic patron.Critics argued that the "floating" buffer zone was unenforceable, and Gov. Deval Patrick in his first year in office signed off on an expanded, fixed protest-free zone around clinics.U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro twice rejected claims by pro-life advocates that the 2007 law was unconstitutional and violated their free speech rights, and his decisions were upheld in January 2013 by a three-judge panel for the U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals.The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the state’s law unconstitutionally restricted speech on public ways and sidewalks. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, found that "buffer zones serve the Commonwealth’s legitimate interests in maintaining public safety on streets and sidewalks and in preserving access to adjacent reproductive healthcare facilities," but wrote that they also "impose serious burdens on petitioners’ speech, depriving them of their two primary methods of communicating with arriving patients: close, personal conversations and distribution of literature."The decision suggests Massachusetts could accomplish its goal of preserving public safety and access to clinics by imposing criminal and civil sanctions for "obstructing, intimidating, or interfering with persons obtaining or providing reproductive health services," or enacting a law requiring crowds blocking a clinic entrance to disperse for a limited period when ordered to do so by the police.